Dallas-Mavs.com Forums - View Single Post

MavKikiNYC · 02-23-2006, 02:23 AM

Disagree with Cowlishaw. Seems like he's gone out of his way a bit to write something unnecessary.

While I would be the first to point out that Nellie never coached a team to the NBA Finals (let alone won a championship ring as a coach), and that his replacement by Avery was at least a year overdue, and that his "transition" to consultant may be every bit as important to the future of the franchise as his original hiring....

He's worthy of being in the HOF. 40 years as a player, coach, GM. Contributor on championship teams as a player. Innovator (though perhaps somewhat overrated) as a coach. Evaluator of talent. Resurrector of franchises.

He's been a very significant figure in the NBA over the last 30 years, as the league's popularity expanded domestically and globally. As far as the HOF goes, the lack of a ring should be just a curiosity. Plenty of great players to recognize, who never got the ring either--Lanier, Ewing, Stockton, Malone, Gervin, Gilmore, Barkley just to name a few.

And for that matter, Motta deserves to be in as well. Sure he was a dick to the press, but that shouldn't keep his contribution from being recognized.

The more valid point that Cowlishaw makes is about the silliness of the process. If the Basketball HOF prides itself on reflecting the history and signficant figures of the game, they should definitely find a better way to make sure significant contributors get recognized.

02-23-2006, 02:23 AM	#9
MavKikiNYC Diamond Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 8,509	Disagree with Cowlishaw. Seems like he's gone out of his way a bit to write something unnecessary. While I would be the first to point out that Nellie never coached a team to the NBA Finals (let alone won a championship ring as a coach), and that his replacement by Avery was at least a year overdue, and that his "transition" to consultant may be every bit as important to the future of the franchise as his original hiring.... He's worthy of being in the HOF. 40 years as a player, coach, GM. Contributor on championship teams as a player. Innovator (though perhaps somewhat overrated) as a coach. Evaluator of talent. Resurrector of franchises. He's been a very significant figure in the NBA over the last 30 years, as the league's popularity expanded domestically and globally. As far as the HOF goes, the lack of a ring should be just a curiosity. Plenty of great players to recognize, who never got the ring either--Lanier, Ewing, Stockton, Malone, Gervin, Gilmore, Barkley just to name a few. And for that matter, Motta deserves to be in as well. Sure he was a dick to the press, but that shouldn't keep his contribution from being recognized. The more valid point that Cowlishaw makes is about the silliness of the process. If the Basketball HOF prides itself on reflecting the history and signficant figures of the game, they should definitely find a better way to make sure significant contributors get recognized. Last edited by MavKikiNYC; 02-23-2006 at 02:24 AM.